Politics of the Dead
I remember being warned a long time ago on a website by a seemingly far left, right-wing bashing twerp that I should look out for the political parallels in the movie “Land of the Dead.” And because I like to make it a habit of listening to seemingly far left, right-wing bashing twerps (No, not really), I made a point to do so last night when I watched the UNCUT edition. I know Hollywood likes to do that with some movies that have plenty more erotic or scary material to show than what’s released in the theatres, but I got more of what I wanted in this movie: just freaky zombie action.
Let’s go for a little history lesson: George A. Romero, the film’s director, is the man who practically invented the zombie movie genre. He made “Night of the Living Dead (1968)”, and followed that up with it’s indirect sequels, “Dawn of the Dead (1978)” and “Day of the Dead (1985).” The first one scared the bejeezus out of me when I was nine years old and scarred me for many years, but I grew to like it much later on in life. When I got into college, I started watching more horror movies, the two sequels included. And you know what? They bored me. They really bored me because I wanted a zombie scare festival with plenty of chills and guts, and what I got was only some of that and the rest of the movie being a commentary on the human condition and how screwed up it can be. I actually enjoyed “Dawn of the Dead (2004)” better than the original because it focused more on the freakiness I wanted. In conclusion, when I see a zombie movie, there’d better be plenty of guts eating and the like and less morals about how capitalism is boring and humans can be just plain evil.
So as you can imagine, I approached this movie with some skepticism. I did like it though. I thought it was the best in the series since the first one. Here’s why:
The Story: The dead finally occupy most of the planet and one of the only human cities left is a New York like area where the bulk of the story takes place. Riley, the hero, is a guy who wants to escape the city with some friends and establish a mini-colony some place in Canada where there aren’t even zombies. Cholo (played by the great John Leguizamo) works for the city government with his little army of zombie killers protecting the city and “taking out the trash” for the guys upstairs. Kaufman (Played by Dennis Hopper, man!), the lead guy upstairs who created the city as a safe haven for the living, has a few skeletons in his closet and isn’t perfect. Neither are his fellow big-wigs.
Given that information, we first see how Romero turns the black and white colors that he started off with into shades of grey. It appears as though the zombies are starting to think and communicate with one another as well as act the same way they did when they were living. They are becoming more human and evolving. In many ways, they are like us, the only difference being that they like to feed on the flesh of the living. So Cholo and his boys go out on midnight runs with their tank, the “Dead Reckoning,” blasting zombies left and right. Even the ones who haven’t done anything yet, as far as we know. So these zombies, led by the biggest, blackest, nastiest looking zombie ever, go for revenge and plan an attack on the city. Now we ask ourselves, who are the real bad guys, the living or the dead? Seems to me like the living are pretty nasty too. And to top it off, the city has an amusement park used for zombie torture and humiliation. Wow, we’re so evil!
As well as the ole “human condition” thing going on, I had my senses tuned to the political whatnot as well. Can there be a comparison made between this movie and current world affairs? Vaguely. Cholo, the crazed zombie killer who likes what he does a little too much, asks Kaufman for a house and stuff because he’s been such a good boy these past few years doing Kaufman’s dirty work. But Kaufman says “No, you’ll have to be put on the waiting list.” And when Cholo doesn’t accept no for an answer, Kaufman tries to have him killed, but fails miserably. Now armed with anger and hatred, Cholo and crew take the “Dead Reckoning” and aim it’s missiles at Kaufman’s tower in the city, telling Kaufman that they want $5 million or the tower gets it (God knows where they’re going to spend that money.) Keyword, they refer to it as a TOWER. Does it by any chance have a twin?
Now for the parallel: I’m no expert historian, but I do know that the folks of the U.S. government have given Osama training in past. A LONG time ago, might I add. And we’ve discovered since then that it has been a HUGE mistake to even rub elbows with such people. And how did they pay us back in the end? They took away our twin towers, part of our Pentagon and almost our White House as well. And if you think my connection is too vague, here’s something else: Kaufman refers to Cholo and his gang as “terrorists”, and Cholo declares a “jihad” on Kaufman with some sarcasm, although he’s Latino last time I checked and not of any Middle Eastern descent. Basically, this is a representation of our government making bad guys.
There’s plenty more little connections in the film to modern day world conditions, but in short, Romero’s getting rather left-wing preachy with this movie. If you can ignore that, you’ll have a good time watching zombie guts and gore (If you’re a sick horror geek like me who’s into that, that is.) If not, ignore this movie. Oh, and if you want to know, the hero guy Riley tracks down the “Dead Reckoning,” foils Cholo’s plot and they all wind up going back to the city to ward of the invading army of the dead. And Kaufman and Cholo wind up killing each other thanks to the unwritten book of horror movie rules: If you cause conflict in a horror movie, you will die. All in all, it was a good enough movie for me.
Oh, and on another note, I’m graduating from College of Marin at the end of this Spring! Woohoo!
Let’s go for a little history lesson: George A. Romero, the film’s director, is the man who practically invented the zombie movie genre. He made “Night of the Living Dead (1968)”, and followed that up with it’s indirect sequels, “Dawn of the Dead (1978)” and “Day of the Dead (1985).” The first one scared the bejeezus out of me when I was nine years old and scarred me for many years, but I grew to like it much later on in life. When I got into college, I started watching more horror movies, the two sequels included. And you know what? They bored me. They really bored me because I wanted a zombie scare festival with plenty of chills and guts, and what I got was only some of that and the rest of the movie being a commentary on the human condition and how screwed up it can be. I actually enjoyed “Dawn of the Dead (2004)” better than the original because it focused more on the freakiness I wanted. In conclusion, when I see a zombie movie, there’d better be plenty of guts eating and the like and less morals about how capitalism is boring and humans can be just plain evil.
So as you can imagine, I approached this movie with some skepticism. I did like it though. I thought it was the best in the series since the first one. Here’s why:
The Story: The dead finally occupy most of the planet and one of the only human cities left is a New York like area where the bulk of the story takes place. Riley, the hero, is a guy who wants to escape the city with some friends and establish a mini-colony some place in Canada where there aren’t even zombies. Cholo (played by the great John Leguizamo) works for the city government with his little army of zombie killers protecting the city and “taking out the trash” for the guys upstairs. Kaufman (Played by Dennis Hopper, man!), the lead guy upstairs who created the city as a safe haven for the living, has a few skeletons in his closet and isn’t perfect. Neither are his fellow big-wigs.
Given that information, we first see how Romero turns the black and white colors that he started off with into shades of grey. It appears as though the zombies are starting to think and communicate with one another as well as act the same way they did when they were living. They are becoming more human and evolving. In many ways, they are like us, the only difference being that they like to feed on the flesh of the living. So Cholo and his boys go out on midnight runs with their tank, the “Dead Reckoning,” blasting zombies left and right. Even the ones who haven’t done anything yet, as far as we know. So these zombies, led by the biggest, blackest, nastiest looking zombie ever, go for revenge and plan an attack on the city. Now we ask ourselves, who are the real bad guys, the living or the dead? Seems to me like the living are pretty nasty too. And to top it off, the city has an amusement park used for zombie torture and humiliation. Wow, we’re so evil!
As well as the ole “human condition” thing going on, I had my senses tuned to the political whatnot as well. Can there be a comparison made between this movie and current world affairs? Vaguely. Cholo, the crazed zombie killer who likes what he does a little too much, asks Kaufman for a house and stuff because he’s been such a good boy these past few years doing Kaufman’s dirty work. But Kaufman says “No, you’ll have to be put on the waiting list.” And when Cholo doesn’t accept no for an answer, Kaufman tries to have him killed, but fails miserably. Now armed with anger and hatred, Cholo and crew take the “Dead Reckoning” and aim it’s missiles at Kaufman’s tower in the city, telling Kaufman that they want $5 million or the tower gets it (God knows where they’re going to spend that money.) Keyword, they refer to it as a TOWER. Does it by any chance have a twin?
Now for the parallel: I’m no expert historian, but I do know that the folks of the U.S. government have given Osama training in past. A LONG time ago, might I add. And we’ve discovered since then that it has been a HUGE mistake to even rub elbows with such people. And how did they pay us back in the end? They took away our twin towers, part of our Pentagon and almost our White House as well. And if you think my connection is too vague, here’s something else: Kaufman refers to Cholo and his gang as “terrorists”, and Cholo declares a “jihad” on Kaufman with some sarcasm, although he’s Latino last time I checked and not of any Middle Eastern descent. Basically, this is a representation of our government making bad guys.
There’s plenty more little connections in the film to modern day world conditions, but in short, Romero’s getting rather left-wing preachy with this movie. If you can ignore that, you’ll have a good time watching zombie guts and gore (If you’re a sick horror geek like me who’s into that, that is.) If not, ignore this movie. Oh, and if you want to know, the hero guy Riley tracks down the “Dead Reckoning,” foils Cholo’s plot and they all wind up going back to the city to ward of the invading army of the dead. And Kaufman and Cholo wind up killing each other thanks to the unwritten book of horror movie rules: If you cause conflict in a horror movie, you will die. All in all, it was a good enough movie for me.
Oh, and on another note, I’m graduating from College of Marin at the end of this Spring! Woohoo!
posted by Jaimetud at 5:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home